EVE Search - Is any of this considered an exploit?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Is any of this considered an exploit?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 3 post(s)
Ghoest	Posted - 2006.12.04 19:21:00 - [1] Edited by: Ghoest on 04/12/2006 19:22:22 I dont see why it would be but I want to check. All these are when you scan and drop in on a high sec misssion runner. -tagging mission rats for bounty -out right killing all the mission rats for bounty -looting all the cans, assuming you wont be attacked because the mission runner is engaged with NPCs -killing the rat that drops the mission specific item and taking the item, then ransoming it to the mission runner. -killing the spawn trigger NPCs so they misssion runners dies Wherever you went - here you are.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2006.12.04 19:31:00 - [2] no exploit, only griefing maybe, if done repeatedly and for no (big) profit to you other than annoying the PvE-er(s) _____ -sig- This is my only char. These are my skills Always question everything, including yourself
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2006.12.04 19:35:00 - [3] The only one thats a bit on the iffy side might be the first one, but even that I highly doubt it. -----------------------------------------------
Verus Potestas Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2006.12.04 19:36:00 - [4] Originally by: Akita T no exploit, only griefing maybe, if done repeatedly and for no (big) profit to you other than annoying the PvE-er(s) All of that is profitable. Between corps atm, the NPC one is strictly a temporary thing. RAWR!111 Sig Hijackz0r!!11 - Immy
Matalino Gallente	Posted - 2006.12.04 19:46:00 - [5] Originally by: Ghoest -killing the rat that drops the mission specific item and taking the item, then ransoming it to the mission runner. This will get you flagged according to the KB, but otherwise sounds like legit use of game mechanics. I doubt it will win you any friends though.
Ghoest	Posted - 2006.12.04 19:52:00 - [6] Ya that one will get you flagged - but if your in a HAC its unlikely the mission runner is going to attack you for it. Wherever you went - here you are.
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2006.12.04 19:58:00 - [7] Originally by: Ghoest Ya that one will get you flagged - but if your in a HAC its unlikely the mission runner is going to attack you for it. Depends what the runners in. Domi > HAC any day. -----------------------------------------------
Galk Gallente Autumn Tactics All the things she said	Posted - 2006.12.04 20:05:00 - [8] Originally by: Ghoest -killing the rat that drops the mission specific item and taking the item, then ransoming it to the mission runner. If this happens to anybody, petition it straight away. It was classed as an exploit/greifing a long time ago. ______
Ghoest	Posted - 2006.12.04 20:19:00 - [9] Why is that exploit and nothing else on the list is? The unwritten exploit rules of EVE are too complicated. Wherever you went - here you are.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2006.12.04 20:25:00 - [10] Edited by: Akita T on 04/12/2006 20:25:37 Originally by: Ghoest The unwritten (and bannable if you attempt to write them) exploit/griefing rules of EVE are way too complicated. Corrected and QFFT. The double F was intentional. _____ -sig- This is my only char. These are my skills Always question everything, including yourself
Galk Gallente Autumn Tactics All the things she said	Posted - 2006.12.04 20:29:00 - [11] The rest of it could be considered harrasment if somebody continiously targeted an individual... per the eula. But that one with the mission item that stops you from completing is considerd to be greifing, it was classed as such in early 04 if i remember right. Don't get me wrong, the lot is lame, but whatever. ______
Ghoest	Posted - 2006.12.04 20:37:00 - [12] There would be no reason pick on one person. Just go to one of the now popular high sec lvl 4 mission systemms and screw over who ever you scan. Wherever you went - here you are.
Nymos Celtic Anarchy Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2006.12.04 20:42:00 - [13] Originally by: Galk Originally by: Ghoest -killing the rat that drops the mission specific item and taking the item, then ransoming it to the mission runner. If this happens to anybody, petition it straight away. It was classed as an exploit/greifing a long time ago. if it's an exploit, where is that stated? and why did ccp dumbify scanning then? yea the old system was retarded, but looking at how easy it is to scan stuff now it sure attracts "griefers". if i had the scanning skills i'd do it too lol. only got astrometrics 3 and cov ops 4, not gonna waste time on all the new scanning skills so it takes me longer to finish a scan than a 5au probe lives :P i'm interested in what ccp wants to do about it now. nerf probes? why "improve" them in the first place then? make mission pockets unscannable? why? that affects low-sec and 0.0 mission running as well and there you sure as hell need the possibility to scan out mission runners. move all lvl4 missions to low-sec --
Galk Gallente Autumn Tactics All the things she said	Posted - 2006.12.04 20:49:00 - [14] Edited by: Galk on 04/12/2006 20:49:56 Trust me, im 100% sure per the last offical word on the subject, you steal a mission item that stops the missioner from completing the mission... he has every right to petition you for greifing. Anyone care to confirm thats still the case, it was 2 years ago. ______
Ghoest	Posted - 2006.12.04 21:01:00 - [15] CCP should make a list of blatently obvious ideas that they have decided are exploits. I understand not publishing stuff thats a exploiting a bug. But these seems just as reasonable as pirating to me. Wherever you went - here you are.

Jiekon	Posted - 2006.12.04 21:06:00 - [16] I`ll see if i can get an official answer from a senior member of the dev team tomorrow regarding these issues. As far as i'm concerned, nothing in the list is an exploit. But i don't have the final say in the matter so my personal view may be different from CCP's official view. If in doubt, petition and let the GM's handle it ^_^ ___________________________ ~Jiekon Known Issues Bug Reporting ███████████████ ███████████████ ███████████████ ███████████████ ███████████████

Ghoest	Posted - 2006.12.04 21:57:00 - [17] Thanks Jiekon. In quite interested to exactly what is allowed. Wherever you went - here you are.
Ithildin Gallente The Corporation The Corporation Alliance	Posted - 2006.12.04 22:02:00 - [18] I shouldn't think any of that will ever be an exploit, but they might (and possibly should) protect mission triggers so that only the mission runner can pick up the intended items, etc. (ukillable and unlootable cans for non-mission owner) - EVE is sick.
Michayel Lyon The Corporation	Posted - 2006.12.04 22:15:00 - [19] Originally by: Jiekon If in doubt, petition and let the GM's handle it ^_^ Yeah, that worked out great in the big IPO scam debacle. --- Lasiverin Dark > Is everyone here allied? Red Knight > we are allied by our zombie like ability to ***** missions
Galk Gallente Autumn Tactics All the things she said	Posted - 2006.12.04 22:27:00 - [20] Hope so jeirkon. But im still 100% sure 2 years ago when sh*tnitz were going around stealing mission completion persific items to stop people completing missions. You classed it as petitionable greifing. Tbh im shocked you see nothing wrong with that in principle, even if you were unaware. ______
Malthros Zenobia Caldari Independent Navy Reserve	Posted - 2006.12.04 22:58:00 - [21] Originally by: Ghoest Ya that one will get you flagged - but if your in a HAC its unlikely the mission runner is going to attack you for it. Unless they're in a CBC. Originally by: kieron The Carrier was never intended to be a solo OMGWTF mission-farming PWNmobile.
Malthros Zenobia Caldari Independent Navy Reserve	Posted - 2006.12.04 23:02:00 - [22] Originally by: Michayel Lyon Originally by: Jiekon If in doubt, petition and let the GM's handle it ^_^ Yeah, that worked out great in the big IPO scam debacle. The only thing CCP did wrong in the IPO debacle was that they gave the scammed players the isk they lost, which was quite possibly the worst thing they could've done (espeically since they didn't gave it to the other guy as well, thus just adding 40billion isk or so to the game), since they pretty much backed a bunch of people who got scammed, but only in that scam and no other. As far as IPOs go, the extent of GM intervention should be: GM: Did he exploit a game mechanic or violate the EULA/TOS? Player: Well uh, no but I say they grieved me. (aka I was gullable) GM: No reason for us to be involved, scamming is a part of EVE. petition closes Originally by: kieron The Carrier was never intended to be a solo OMGWTF mission-farming PWNmobile.
Ghoest	Posted - 2006.12.05 20:14:00 - [23] Jiekon did you find out anything? Wherever you went - here you are.

Jiekon	Posted - 2006.12.05 20:50:00 - [24] Originally by: Ghoest Jiekon did you find out anything? Not yet, sorry. Things were a little hectic with the patch going out today ___________________________ ~Jiekon Known Issues Bug Reporting ███████████████ ███████████████ ███████████████ ███████████████ ███████████████

Matalino Gallente	Posted - 2006.12.06 19:55:00 - [25] Edited by: Matalino on 06/12/2006 19:59:02 Originally by: Galk Hope so jeirkon. But im still 100% sure 2 years ago when shtnitz were going around stealing mission completion persific items to stop people completing missions. You classed it as petitionable greifing. You would think that if this were petitionable 2 years ago they would have done something more than just add criminal flagging to prevent it. Obviously there is code in place to handle this, as the NPC carrying the mission specific loot is not handled the same way as the other NPC. Originally by:* Galk Tbh im shocked you see nothing wrong with that in principle, even if you were unaware. Of course I see something wrong with it in principle, but that is why you are criminally flagged for taking mission specific loot regarless of who killed the NPC. Do you need CONCORD to show up and ensure that you can finish all your missions? Originally by: Jiekon As far as i'm concerned, nothing in the list is an exploit. But i don't have the final say in the matter so my personal view may be different from CCP's official view. I totally agree with Jiekon. Hopefully we can get an official answer on this so that we can put the matter to rest. Edit - Maybe it was petitionable 2 years ago, before they fixed it with criminal flagging. Without criminal flagging there was really no defence. Now there is a little defence, even if it takes some planning on your part.
Serapis Aote TBC	Posted - 2006.12.06 20:14:00 - [26] Edited by: Serapis Aote on 06/12/2006 20:18:25 Originally by: Jiekon I`ll see if i can get an official answer from a senior member of the dev team tomorrow regarding these issues. As far as i'm concerned, nothing in the list is an exploit. But i don't have the final say in the matter so my personal view may be different from CCP's official view. If in doubt, petition and let the GM's handle it ^_^ Can you also ask them how the hell the mission runner is suppose to avoid a standing loss if some of those things are done..he cant bloody well shoot the guy to stop him from doing it, its high sec. And not everyone loots the mission rat container, some peeps just blow it up and warp out.
ThisIsAScam	Posted - 2006.12.06 20:21:00 - [27] yes it is a huge exploit this is definitely playing the game illegally definitely against the rules of playing the game anyone who does this should be banned forever
ThisIsAScam	Posted - 2006.12.06 20:22:00 - [28] this is a huge technical exploit a patch should be released to fix this immediately
BustyBounty Caldari Vengeance of the Fallen Imperium Alliance	Posted - 2006.12.06 20:25:00 - [29] Edited by: BustyBounty on 06/12/2006 20:26:12 this games one big joke if any of those are considered an exploit. why should mission npcs be any different than belt rats when it comes to player interference? one step closer to a PVE game if there an exploit ------------------------------------------ My opinions are my own and not that of the alliance I belong to.
Kylania Gallente	Posted - 2006.12.06 20:28:00 - [30] Originally by: ThisIsAScam yes it is a huge exploit this is definitely playing the game illegally definitely against the rules of playing the game anyone who does this should be banned forever The answer Jiekon will come back with will probably be "it's always been allowed before" or something equally meh. The difference is that it's completely effortless now, while before there was at least enough annoyance to make sure it didn't happen constantly. -- Lil Miner Newbie Skills Roadmap \| CCG Card Lookup
Hesed Hamartia.	Posted - 2006.12.06 20:28:00 - [31] You retain the option to kill the end boss first and play the mission on hard mode. All you are asking is for CCP to make you immune to anything that prevents afk mission running and frankly nobody that matters cares.
LUGAL MOP'N'GLO	Posted - 2006.12.06 20:28:00 - [32] I still like the idea of the people sniffing around to have to hack the gate in order to jump in. It would make it a bit more realistic. Warp to Gate. Right-Click "Lock Gate for all" Right-Click "Lock Gate for all but corp" Right-click "Lock Gate for all but gang" Right-click "Lock Gate for all but alliance" Enter Deadspace Guy sniffs and finds your gate. Target Gate Engage hacking device I - This is where the devs would have to make a very important decision. How long should the hack take? Well, I don't know how long a normal hack takes, but for the sake of the mission runners, maybe a 32-bit alpha-numeric code. 32 seperate scans, taking maybe from 7-15 minutes. Just to discourage people from finding the gate, hitting the hack mod and going afk for ten minutes. Anyways I don't think its that big of a deal and there are many ways to fix it or improve the situation. Its only happening in the VERY busy systems. If CCP made agents more dynamic, this wouldn't be a problem. Go to station Talk to Agent "Ah dude! I totally forgot to tell you! I'm out on vacation for the next week or so. If you want to talk to me I might have some things for you to do out here while I visit my grandma in * system." OR "Frackin' hell man. I broke my knee and had to go have surgery at * system. I have forwarded my tasks for you to *** in * system. He will be able to give you coordinates to your next assignment." Anyways, just some ideas there. ~~~~~~~~~ I wish my lawn was EMO so it would cut itself. I approve of this message.
ThisIsAScam	Posted - 2006.12.06 20:28:00 - [33] Originally by: BustyBounty Edited by: BustyBounty on 06/12/2006 20:26:12 this games one big joke if any of those are considered an exploit. why should mission npcs be any different than belt rats when it comes to player interference? one step closer to a PVE game if there an exploit it isnt a joke it is completely serious this is a huge problem and exploit and it will be fixed soon men like these will be put to justice
Shemar Gallente Photesthetics Glamour Syndicate	Posted - 2006.12.06 20:31:00 - [34] None of these were a big issue when scanning a mission in progress took skill, brains and work, since your average griefer is 0 out of 3 on those. They become a problem when every idiot can do it. ________________ Enhanced eye sight does not make up for the lack of vision
Serapis Aote TBC	Posted - 2006.12.06 20:35:00 - [35] Edited by: Serapis Aote on 06/12/2006 20:37:17 Edited by: Serapis Aote on 06/12/2006 20:35:42 Originally by: Hesed You retain the option to kill the end boss first and play the mission on hard mode. All you are asking is for CCP to make you immune to anything that prevents afk mission running and frankly nobody that matters cares. Actually its the greifer carebears asking for CCP easy mode for high sec mission jumping. Not be attacked before flagging, and most likely not being attacked before warping out. Also the advantage of only being attacked by players already with NPC aggo on a lvl 4. You are a sad excuse for a pvper you griefing carebear. The only people in eve who want less PvP then missions runners is fools like you. Grow some, come on out to 0.0 or low sec and at least pretend to want to pvp. Edit: And when you do finally grow up and make it out to 0.0 crtl-Q, like we know you want to.
Mayoz Miner	Posted - 2006.12.06 20:40:00 - [36] I dont see how this can be 'balanced' as the people who runs the missions are in PVE set ups. Tbh if CCP want PVPers to PVP on missions aswell then can they make it so the most effective setup for PVE is as effective for PVP .... oh but wait that limits gaming style. Does CCP want mission runners to be PVPing aswell, im confused as to what they want for this game in this regards.
Athanasios Anastasiou Elite Storm Enterprises Storm Armada	Posted - 2006.12.06 20:49:00 - [37] Right now, they want to put some risk into high sec lvl4 missioning.
Antodias Puppets on Steroids iPOD Alliance	Posted - 2006.12.06 20:52:00 - [38] Edited by: Antodias on 06/12/2006 20:52:28 Originally by: Athanasios Anastasiou Right now, they want to put some risk into high sec lvl4 missioning. That's fine, but right now risk and reward aren't balanced. Because basically the griefer can now steal your reward.
Serapis Aote TBC	Posted - 2006.12.06 20:54:00 - [39] Originally by: Athanasios Anastasiou Right now, they want to put some risk into high sec lvl4 missioning. And what is the risk to the person jumping the mission. its not added risk to the mission runner its just stupid, he has no way to protect if his high sec mission get jumped.
X3vious	Posted - 2006.12.06 20:54:00 - [40] if CCP have any sense they'll stop this from happening, especially in high sec. Some one warps in to your mission, takes the completion object - and there is NOTHING you can do - you can't fight them - you'll get destroyed by concord. Pure griefing.
Serapis Aote TBC	Posted - 2006.12.06 21:01:00 - [41] Originally by: X3vious if CCP have any sense they'll stop this from happening, especially in high sec. Some one warps in to your mission, takes the completion object - and there is NOTHING you can do - you can't fight them - you'll get destroyed by concord. Pure griefing. Actually they should be flagged if the loot a mission necessary loot can. But in all honesty, destroying them before they warp out while dealing with the NPCs is going to be difficult. And there is nothing wrong with doing this in low sec.In low sec the mission runner has a chance to engage before the mission is lost.
Nanobotter Mk2	Posted - 2006.12.06 21:09:00 - [42] can thanks the lack of forthought to the super easy new scanning system ( I think making scanning more accessible is fine but they didn't think of all the implications that went with it. )

Jiekon	Posted - 2006.12.06 21:22:00 - [43] I don't have an official comment on this being an exploit or not, If a senior memeber of the dev team wishes to comment, so be it. But all i can say is that if you think something is an exploit, or if you think someone is exploiting, then send a petition to the GM's and they will deal with each case as it arises. Sorry this isn't the answer you were looking for, but it's the only answer i can give you. ___________________________ ~Jiekon Known Issues Bug Reporting ███████████████ ███████████████ ███████████████ ███████████████ ███████████████

Avera Mikou	Posted - 2006.12.06 21:23:00 - [44] Originally by: Ghoest Edited by: Ghoest on 04/12/2006 19:22:22 -tagging mission rats for bounty What is meant by this?
Matalino Gallente	Posted - 2006.12.06 21:46:00 - [45] Originally by: Avera Mikou Originally by: Ghoest Edited by: Ghoest on 04/12/2006 19:22:22 -tagging mission rats for bounty What is meant by this? Container ownership and criminal flagging Quote: When an NPC is killed by a player, the player who did the most damage to it gets ownership of any loot containers dropped by that NPC. I am guessing (haven't tested) that bounties work much the same way. If they don't, doing half the damage (tagging) then letting the mission runner finish off the NPC will still entile you to the loot. If he takes it, he gets flagged.
Serapis Aote TBC	Posted - 2006.12.06 22:24:00 - [46] Edited by: Serapis Aote on 06/12/2006 22:24:35 Originally by: Jiekon I don't have an official comment on this being an exploit or not, If a senior memeber of the dev team wishes to comment, so be it. But all i can say is that if you think something is an exploit, or if you think someone is exploiting, then send a petition to the GM's and they will deal with each case as it arises. Sorry this isn't the answer you were looking for, but it's the only answer i can give you. Thank for trying. Its a bit sad though that there is no answer. Its a drastic game change. Basically giving people the oppurtunity to ruin a mission with little to no chance to stop it. Try locking and killing the person after he loots the mission loot before he warps, while aggroed in a lvl 4. I would say unless you have a full gang its going to be hard, and depending ont he jumpers ships may be impossible. The mission jumper faces little to know risk, while the mission runner looses standing and has little to know way to stop it.
Shamis Orzoz Sniggerdly	Posted - 2006.12.06 22:31:00 - [47] Clearly NOT an exploit. Once they loot your cans, you can shoot them. Use yer guns, or go home.
d026 Herrscher der Zeit Jagdgeschwader The Pentagram	Posted - 2006.12.06 22:36:00 - [48] -tagging mission rats for bounty imo not an exploit:) -out right killing all the mission rats for bounty imo not an exploit:) -looting all the cans, assuming you wont be attacked because the mission runner is engaged with NPCs imo not an exploit:) -killing the rat that drops the mission specific item and taking the item, then ransoming it to the mission runner. imo not an exploit:) -killing the spawn trigger NPCs so they misssion runners dies exploit, kill the missionrunner yourself please!
Avera Mikou	Posted - 2006.12.06 22:53:00 - [49] I still do not understand what is meant by "tagging mission rats for bounty." I do not see any relationship to the rules of container looting in this statement.
Pang Grohl Gallente	Posted - 2006.12.06 23:00:00 - [50] Originally by: Serapis Aote Edited by: Serapis Aote on 06/12/2006 22:24:35 Originally by: Jiekon I don't have an official comment on this being an exploit or not, If a senior memeber of the dev team wishes to comment, so be it. But all i can say is that if you think something is an exploit, or if you think someone is exploiting, then send a petition to the GM's and they will deal with each case as it arises. Sorry this isn't the answer you were looking for, but it's the only answer i can give you. Thank for trying. Its a bit sad though that there is no answer. Its a drastic game change. Basically giving people the oppurtunity to ruin a mission with little to no chance to stop it. Try locking and killing the person after he loots the mission loot before he warps, while aggroed in a lvl 4. I would say unless you have a full gang its going to be hard, and depending ont he jumpers ships may be impossible. The mission jumper faces little to know risk, while the mission runner looses standing and has little to know way to stop it. Get a gang together & you have a game play solution. The same kind of solution that you have for ore thieves, mission looting, gate camps, and most other "grieving" and "exploiting" in EVE. Besides EVE is more fun when played with/against real people. Si non adjuvas, noces (If you're not helping, you're hurting)
Ghoest	Posted - 2006.12.06 23:36:00 - [51] How can a question like this not even have a answer? Thats absurd. Wherever you went - here you are.
Serapis Aote TBC	Posted - 2006.12.07 00:01:00 - [52] Edited by: Serapis Aote on 07/12/2006 00:06:14 double post
Serapis Aote TBC	Posted - 2006.12.07 00:04:00 - [53] Edited by: Serapis Aote on 07/12/2006 00:06:59 Edited by: Serapis Aote on 07/12/2006 00:04:45 Originally by: Shamis Orzoz Clearly NOT an exploit. Once they loot your cans, you can shoot them. Use yer guns, or go home. Yeah, but there are a few problems with that. Say they only go after the mission loot can...what do you think the chances of him killing "you" before you warp out. The main problem i have is the worst tactics (not just looting regular mission drops) but aggroing rooms and warping, and looting the mission loot can, the mission jumper is almost 100% safe and faces almost no risk. While the mission runner faces tremendous risk of standing loss with minimal chance of actually stopping it. its not the same as in a low sec mission where the mission runner and mates actually have a chance to stop the activity before it goes wrong by engaging the intruder. The fact that in high sec the mission runner is a more of a disadvantage because he has to wait and react, and in the case of a looted mission loot can, probably will not be able to react in enough time to save the mission that makes the tactic lame. For the most part there is no PvP envolved at all the mission jumper is jumping the hi sec mission mainly because he knows there is little to know chance of actaul combat. Originally by: Pang Grohl Originally by: Serapis Aote Edited by: Serapis Aote on 06/12/2006 22:24:35 Originally by: Jiekon I don't have an official comment on this being an exploit or not, If a senior memeber of the dev team wishes to comment, so be it. But all i can say is that if you think something is an exploit, or if you think someone is exploiting, then send a petition to the GM's and they will deal with each case as it arises. Sorry this isn't the answer you were looking for, but it's the only answer i can give you. Thank for trying. Its a bit sad though that there is no answer. Its a drastic game change. Basically giving people the oppurtunity to ruin a mission with little to no chance to stop it. Try locking and killing the person after he loots the mission loot before he warps, while aggroed in a lvl 4. I would say unless you have a full gang its going to be hard, and depending ont he jumpers ships may be impossible. The mission jumper faces little to know risk, while the mission runner looses standing and has little to know way to stop it. Get a gang together & you have a game play solution. The same kind of solution that you have for ore thieves, mission looting, gate camps, and most other "grieving" and "exploiting" in EVE. Besides EVE is more fun when played with/against real people. And that gang to do what to the mission jumper before teh mission jumper takes loots the can. How long does it take to loot the can and warp. How long does it take to draw full room agro and warp. and if he does this he is still not killable.
Ansuru Starlancer The Phoenix Rising Distant Star Alliance	Posted - 2006.12.07 00:19:00 - [54] People have a real issue with using the word "exploit" incorrectly in this game. Exploit = repeated use of a glitch/bugged game mechanic for personal gain. For the most part, these are not glitches/bugged game mechanics. What the OP really should have asked is, are any of these considered griefing/harrassment? THIS is where CCP's specific policies are the only source for the final say. Personally, I'd consider 1, 4, and 5 griefing. 1 is iffy, because I'm not sure exactly how rat tagging works...if someone could explain that, I'd appreciate it. 4 is just simple harassment. I'd call it an exploit, but it's not so much for personal gain as for forcing others to lose..."Hey bub, I got yer mission item. Lose a bunch of isk, or lose a bunch of standing, your pick!" If they choose to shoot you, or ignore you, you don't gain much, but they still lose out. 5 is no different than intentionally training a bunch of mobs on someone in a different MMO. Again, file griefing/harassment petition.
Kryss Darkdust	Posted - 2006.12.07 00:51:00 - [55] Originally by: Ghoest Why is that exploit and nothing else on the list is? The unwritten exploit rules of EVE are too complicated. An exploit is anything that is done for an unintended purpose. For example a bug that allows you to duplicate an item would be an exploit. Griefing is a bit harder to qualify and in most cases CCP takes it as a case by case basis. I can assure you however from past experiance that if you take a mission item and try to ransom it you will get a warning from CCP if the person petitions and could potentially have your account suspended or even canceled if you refuse to stop. Why? Because trying to make money by stealing mission items and ransoming them is not how the game is intended to be played by CCP's definition, the fact that the mechanics allow it doesn't change that. Are you are gamer? www.playhardliveeasy.blogspot.com
d026 Herrscher der Zeit Jagdgeschwader The Pentagram	Posted - 2006.12.07 00:56:00 - [56] few things to do are: - agressor needs to get the same amount of dps as the missionrunner. - you get killrights for everybody entering mission deadspace whos not in your gang/corp. (only in hisec) - pirates hiding in noobcorps need to get expelled and put into a corp where you can wardec them.
Xaildaine	Posted - 2006.12.07 02:59:00 - [57] Originally by: Jiekon I don't have an official comment on this being an exploit or not, If a senior memeber of the dev team wishes to comment, so be it. But all i can say is that if you think something is an exploit, or if you think someone is exploiting, then send a petition to the GM's and they will deal with each case as it arises. Sorry this isn't the answer you were looking for, but it's the only answer i can give you. We need an answer sooner rather than later If CCPs feeling is that a pirate should be able to warp in, agro the entire spawn and warp out leaving the scrambled Mission runner (NPCs scram you know) to be ganked then we need to know as soon as posable. griefer with scanner + scraming NPCs + poor agro mechanics = ganked mission runner = free can of t2 loot + no agro timer + 0 risk to pirate Leaving this to fester is Not good for the game
Shemar Gallente Photesthetics Glamour Syndicate	Posted - 2006.12.07 03:23:00 - [58] It looks to me like CCP is avoiding to take a stance on this. My advise to mission runners is: If your mission critical loot is 'stolen' or someone aggroes the room on you intentionally, that probably classifies as grief play, so petition it. Even if they don't want to officiallt classify it as grief play, let a few hundred such petitions a day clog the queue until they are forced to at least take a stance. One person that I know petitioned an incident of stolen mission critical loot, was given the loot by the GM, so under no circumstances pay the scumbag that stole it, just petition it. ________________ Enhanced eye sight does not make up for the lack of vision
Shemar Gallente Photesthetics Glamour Syndicate	Posted - 2006.12.07 03:30:00 - [59] Heh, serves me right for not reading the info section first: Originally by: kieron Adjustments to the scan system so that: -griefing mission runners in deadspace complexes is more difficult, and -scan results are easier to interpret, Adjustments to the escalating path system, Changes to the wreck icons so non-Salvagers can identify wrecks containing lootable modules, and Adjustments to the salvage contained in a wreck, thus resulting in better and/or more frequent salvage drops. So I guess it's wait and see until next week's patch for now. ________________ Enhanced eye sight does not make up for the lack of vision
Deikan Frost Amarr	Posted - 2006.12.07 04:44:00 - [60] Originally by: Ghoest There would be no reason pick on one person. Just go to one of the now popular high sec lvl 4 mission systemms and screw over who ever you scan. I just don't get it... WHY other than to purposely irritate the mission runner would you do this if he can't even attack you? This is fraking lame... get a life! Sig Size: 374x115 pixels - 136Kb
Deikan Frost Amarr	Posted - 2006.12.07 04:54:00 - [61] Originally by: Shemar Heh, serves me right for not reading the info section first: Originally by: kieron Adjustments to the scan system so that: -griefing mission runners in deadspace complexes is more difficult, and -scan results are easier to interpret, Adjustments to the escalating path system, Changes to the wreck icons so non-Salvagers can identify wrecks containing lootable modules, and Adjustments to the salvage contained in a wreck, thus resulting in better and/or more frequent salvage drops. So I guess it's wait and see until next week's patch for now. Linkage? I can't find that post... where did you find it?
Shinshi Casoyako	Posted - 2006.12.07 10:07:00 - [62] Originally by: Ghoest Edited by: Ghoest on 04/12/2006 19:22:22 I dont see why it would be but I want to check. All these are when you scan and drop in on a high sec misssion runner. -tagging mission rats for bounty -out right killing all the mission rats for bounty -looting all the cans, assuming you wont be attacked because the mission runner is engaged with NPCs -killing the rat that drops the mission specific item and taking the item, then ransoming it to the mission runner. -killing the spawn trigger NPCs so they misssion runners dies Killing such a griever should not be a big problem. . Seriously Have I Not Said How I Can Assist Some One You Are Killing Online?
Xaildaine	Posted - 2006.12.07 14:03:00 - [63] Originally by: Shemar Heh, serves me right for not reading the info section first: Originally by: kieron Adjustments to the scan system so that: -griefing mission runners in deadspace complexes is more difficult, and -scan results are easier to interpret, Adjustments to the escalating path system, Changes to the wreck icons so non-Salvagers can identify wrecks containing lootable modules, and Adjustments to the salvage contained in a wreck, thus resulting in better and/or more frequent salvage drops. So I guess it's wait and see until next week's patch for now. Regardless of how hard it is to do, it still needs to be made clear if spoiling a Mission for the mission runner is Grief-play or not. The longer this question is unanswerd the more this argument will fester. It needs a clear Post by a CCP employee
Ishmael Hansen No Quarter.	Posted - 2006.12.07 14:24:00 - [64] Originally by: Xaildaine Originally by: Shemar Heh, serves me right for not reading the info section first: Originally by: kieron Adjustments to the scan system so that: -griefing mission runners in deadspace complexes is more difficult, and -scan results are easier to interpret, Adjustments to the escalating path system, Changes to the wreck icons so non-Salvagers can identify wrecks containing lootable modules, and Adjustments to the salvage contained in a wreck, thus resulting in better and/or more frequent salvage drops. So I guess it's wait and see until next week's patch for now. Regardless of how hard it is to do, it still needs to be made clear if spoiling a Mission for the mission runner is Grief-play or not. The longer this question is unanswerd the more this argument will fester. It needs a clear Post by a CCP employee Imo it's not the spoiling of the missions that is the issue, but spoiling it in high sec systems where the mission runner can't do nothing but watch it. It's on the same level as ore thieves and loot thieves in high sec. It is very lame and CCP should ban their main accounts as this type of player don't even has courage to do this with his main, but get some alts to do it. The ammount of pirates I've found in eve, I have the upmost respect for them as they all have honour, snigg, tsbs, etc, now this griefers should have their clones cancelled.
Admiral Pieg Caldari	Posted - 2006.12.07 14:34:00 - [65] Originally by: Ishmael Hansen Originally by: Xaildaine Originally by: Shemar Heh, serves me right for not reading the info section first: Originally by: kieron Adjustments to the scan system so that: -griefing mission runners in deadspace complexes is more difficult, and -scan results are easier to interpret, Adjustments to the escalating path system, Changes to the wreck icons so non-Salvagers can identify wrecks containing lootable modules, and Adjustments to the salvage contained in a wreck, thus resulting in better and/or more frequent salvage drops. So I guess it's wait and see until next week's patch for now. Regardless of how hard it is to do, it still needs to be made clear if spoiling a Mission for the mission runner is Grief-play or not. The longer this question is unanswerd the more this argument will fester. It needs a clear Post by a CCP employee Imo it's not the spoiling of the missions that is the issue, but spoiling it in high sec systems where the mission runner can't do nothing but watch it. It's on the same level as ore thieves and loot thieves in high sec. It is very lame and CCP should ban their main accounts as this type of player don't even has courage to do this with his main, but get some alts to do it. The ammount of pirates I've found in eve, I have the upmost respect for them as they all have honour, snigg, tsbs, etc, now this griefers should have their clones cancelled. I disagree on the ban thing, there are better ways to resolve this. Just give the mission runner kill rights on anyone that warps in on his mission and were set! ______________ Pod from above.
Alex Antari Caldari MC Cubed Inc Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.12.07 15:25:00 - [66] Yes, do give them kill rights, but also make kill rights tranferable through contracts. This should put some fun in the mission-crashers gameplay! -- My post does not represent the official stance of my corporation or alliance, unless I specifically say so!
Shemar Gallente Photesthetics Glamour Syndicate	Posted - 2006.12.07 15:33:00 - [67] Originally by: Deikan Frost Originally by: Shemar Heh, serves me right for not reading the info section first: Originally by: kieron Adjustments to the scan system so that: -griefing mission runners in deadspace complexes is more difficult, and -scan results are easier to interpret, Adjustments to the escalating path system, Changes to the wreck icons so non-Salvagers can identify wrecks containing lootable modules, and Adjustments to the salvage contained in a wreck, thus resulting in better and/or more frequent salvage drops. So I guess it's wait and see until next week's patch for now. Linkage? I can't find that post... where did you find it? Here ________________ Enhanced eye sight does not make up for the lack of vision

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.